Date: 20011009
Docket: A-30-00
Neutral citation: 2001 FCA 293
CORAM: RICHARD C.J.
BETWEEN:
ATTORNEY GENERAL
OF CANADA
Applicant
and
JULIE TOURANGEAU
Respondent
Hearing held at Montréal, Quebec, on October 9, 2001.
Judgment delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec, on October 9, 2001.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: DESJARDINS J.A.
Date: 20011009
Docket: A-30-00
Neutral citation: 2001 FCA 293
CORAM: RICHARD C.J.
BETWEEN:
ATTORNEY GENERAL
OF CANADA
Applicant
and
JULIE TOURANGEAU
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(Delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec
on October 9, 2001.)
[1] We are of the opinion that the Umpire erred when he concluded, contrary to the finding of the Board of Referees, that the respondent was justified in leaving her job to pursue her studies and that leaving was the only reasonable solution in her case.
[2] It is settled law that voluntarily leaving one's job to attend a course of instruction that is not authorized by the Commission (see section 25 of the Employment Insurance Act, S.C. 1996, c. 23) does not constitute just cause within the meaning of that Act (Attorney General of Canada v. Laurie Martel (1994), 175 N.R. 275, pages 282 and 283, pp.110-111; Attorney General of Canada v. Robert Barnett (1996), 205 N.R. 392, p. 114; Attorney General of Canada and Laurie A. Furey (1996), 201 N.R. 237, p. 118; Attorney General of Canada and Greg Stevens (1996), 195 N.R. 392, p. 126; Attorney General of Canada and Anna-Monique West, A-349-95 (unreported decision, February 20, 1996, p. 131); Canada (Attorney General) v. Bois, 2001 FCA 175 ([2001] F.C.A. No. 878 (QL)); Canada (Attorney General) v. Mancheron, 2001 FCA 174 ([2001] F.C.A. No. 880 (QL)).
[3] The respondent could not validly cite moving as a reason for leaving since it resulted from her going back to school. Nor could she claim to be available for another job and to have taken steps to find employment in her new location since the conditions prescribed in section 18 of the Act (formerly section 14) do not apply to section 29 of the Act (Attorney General of Canada v. Faltermeier (1995), 187 N.R. 305).
[4] The application for judicial review will be allowed with costs, the decision of the Umpire will be set aside, and the matter will be referred back to the Chief Umpire or an umpire designated by him for determination on the basis that the respondent is disqualified from receiving benefits because she left her job "without just cause" within the meaning of sections 29 and 30 of the Act.
"Alice Desjardins"
J.A.
Certified true translation
Sophie Debbané, LL.B.
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
Date: 20011009
Docket: A-30-00
Between:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Applicant
and
JULIE TOURANGEAU
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-30-00
CORAM: RICHARD C.J.
DESJARDINS J.A.
DÉCARY J.A.
STYLE OF CAUSE:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Applicant
and
JULIE TOURANGEAU
Respondent
PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: October 9, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
OF THE COURT BY: THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE DESJARDINS
DATED: October 9, 2001
APPEARANCES:
|
Suzon Létourneau |
FOR THE APPLICANT |
|
Jean-Guy Campeau |
FOR THE RESPONDENT |
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
|
Morris Rosenberg Deputy Attorney general of Canada Montréal, Quebec |
FOR THE APPLICANT |
|
Longueuil, Quebec |
FOR THE RESPONDENT |
Date: 20011009
Docket: A-30-00
Montréal, Quebec, October 9, 2001
Coram: RICHARD C.J.
DESJARDINS J.A.
DÉCARY J.A.
BETWEEN:
ATTORNEY GENERAL
OF CANADA
Applicant
and
JULIE TOURANGEAU
Respondent
JUDGMENT
The application for judicial review is allowed with costs, the decision of the Umpire is set aside, and the matter is referred back to the Chief Umpire or the Umpire designated by him for determination on the basis that the respondent is disqualified from receiving benefits because she left her job "without just cause" within the meaning of sections 29 and 30 of the Act.
"J. Richard"
Chief Justice
Certified true translation
Sophie Debbané, LL.B.